Overstating as usual, non-seq? From The Confederate States of America, 1861-1865: A Financial and Industrial History of the South During the Civil War, by John Christopher Schwab, 1901, page 240-241:
The first distinctive Confederate tariff was enacted on March 15, 1861, and levied a 15% ad valorem duty upon the importation of coal, iron, paper, and lumber. This was soon elaborated into the tariff of May 21, 1861, which, slightly amended on August 8, and put into force on August 31, expressed the tariff policy of the Confederate States during the war. As was to be expected, the Confederate Congress perfected a revenue measure from which almost every trace of protective motives was removed. In fact the protective principle was discountenanced by both Confederate Constitutions, for under the old regime the South always felt that the burden of the tariff had fallen chiefly on its own shoulders.
As in the case of the old tariffs of 1846 and 1857, each rate was avowedly aimed at deriving the largest possible customs revenue from the particular articles to which it applied. In carrying out this principle, the Confederate tariff lowered the former rates of 1857, especially the leading 24% rate to 15%, coal and coke, raw hemp and tobacco, leather, iron ore, and pig iron, from 24% to 10%. The duty on sugar and molasses, however, was but slightly reduced, from 24% to 20%, perhaps from lingering protectionist motives, which we shall see were not wholly absent.
The Confederate Congress wasn't perfect, but it did a pretty good job of sticking by its principles as regards protective tariffs.
Actually I'm not overstating at all, and am actually more correct than your post was. The confederate tariff placed a 25% duty on tobacco products. It placed a 25% duty on molasses. A 15% duty on salt and turpentine and any sort of manufactured cotton items. A 15% tariff on iron goods like iron bars, slabs, and castings. All Southern industries. All which had their prices protected by the tariff. Link
The Confederate Congress wasn't perfect, but it did a pretty good job of sticking by its principles as regards protective tariffs.
On the contrary. Read the tariff yourself.